Chap. XL] Physiognomjj* 157 



of nature in his day. But the first distinct and 

 formal treatise on the subject is by Aristotle, 

 whose work, as it displays tbe power of his great 

 mind, so it may be considered as the guide to all 

 subsequent inquiries, and the basis of every phy- 

 siognomical treatise tliat has since appeared. After 

 Aristotle, his disciple Theophrastus wrote on phy- 

 siognomy, in a very accurate and interesting mau- 

 nea'. He was succeeded by a number of other* 

 less conspicuous ; and, indeed, at every period of 

 the history of Greece and Home, when learning 

 was cultivated in any considerable degree, we hear 

 something of men who employed themselves in in- 

 vestiiratino: and teachino- this science. 



But when the Roman empire was overthrown 

 by her northern invaders, and when, in the general 

 wreck, the various departments of philosophy were 

 buried in forgetfulness, physiognomy also became, 

 in a great measure, neglected and forgotten, as a 

 specific object of study. For a number of centu- 

 ries we hear little or nothing about it. At the be- 

 ginning of the sixteenth century we fmd it again 

 exciting some attention, and from that time till 

 near the close of the seventeenth, it continued to 

 be a general and fashionable subject of inquiry. 

 Within that period the writers on physiognomy 

 were very numerous, and some of them respccta- 

 ble and instructive. 



There was one circumstance, hov/cvcr, con- 

 nected with the study of physiognomy, within the 

 period last mentioned, which served to throw it 

 into a kind of temporary disgrace, and which cer- 

 tainly retarded its progress. Tor more than two 

 ^centuries after the revival of learning, tlie arts ol' 



